Deliberative Network Ideas:
problem: Security threat - for content:
Innocent posts on forums and social networks can be imprisoned in authoritarian countries.
There laws are specially ambiguous + lawlessness, fabrication of cases.
problem: Security threat - for participating in the " organization " ;:
Writing and supposedly not showing it to anyone is safe, even if someone finds it on your own.
Writing on a personal website where you can't see your readers is also safe enough.
It is a little more dangerous if links from other people appear to this site or to the content on it.
But fame, especially among Western human rights defenders, simultaneously increases security.
The most dangerous thing today is being physically in the square with a poster.
problem: total ban:
For example, I will face a total ban in the US and other dem. countries.
I was banned on dozens of forums, even on Facebook, on the Freedom of Speech sites etc.
Which is surprising, since my content does not contain extremism or the like, insults, or anything that does not comply with the `` agreements '' these sites.
Perhaps my content is simply too simple, and the responsible executors are simply taking it out of harm's way.
Problem: Google Censored:
For example, I have not found a search engine that would not unambiguously filter the search results, or would only filter by user settings.
problem: Contact-necks:
On the first hand, specialization has `` pluses '' - a lawyer, for example, will be good at defending blacks.
On the second hand, without transparency - the visibility of correspondence by all participants - he can be wrong, to put it mildly.
Example: Trotskyists:
Anti-bureaucratic CWI (Committee for a Workers' International) at World Congress elects' Executive Body ' - IEC, which elects the `` Administrative Body '' - The International Secretariat, which `` handles the day-to-day work of the CWI '', including correspondence.
The latter employ in their organization a specialist responsible for correspondence, who turns out to be anti-Workers ', an agent of the special service, or simply has his own narrow understanding of the Workers' movement.
Or they develop instructions for it with criteria that, in principle, cannot be universal and formalized.
By the way, in 2019, the International Secretariat carried out a bureaucratic coup in the CWI. and `` achieved a devastating split in the largest socialist organization in the world. ''
However:
“Grassroots are taking on innovative forms outside of formal structures.
Most CWIs remain union-oriented.
The main guarantee of a healthy democracy is not the rules, but the critical thinking of members with political understanding and education. which allows you to fully participate in all discussions.
We are determined to debate and debate in order to learn all the lessons from the crisis we have experienced. ''
51 FBI agents served on the executive committees of the small Socialist Workers Party (US), and 55 served on SWP committees until 1976.
Although the agents took part in the `` degeneration '' Social Democracy and the remnants of Trotskyist parties, but it is not they who are to blame, but the activists themselves, primarily not by creating adequate tools and not developing high-quality Programs.
At the same time, the Internet makes "Executive bodies" unnecessary, and AI is able to help correspondence and everyday work as well as `` specialists ''.
Return Russia:
Russia, which 100 years ago declared itself the vanguard of progress, today has become the main distributor of reaction and the main threat to Civilization.
To Internationalists Britain needs to leave Britain alone, and first of all help Russia, first of all - theoretically - with constructive counter-propaganda, since the FBI is far from the FSB.
For example, communists and capitalists can cooperate on the survival platform.
Example: Personal experience:
In the 2000s, there was a DVK movement in Kazakhstan.
I became interested in him, found their office, went into it several times.
Found there `` quilted jackets '' = `` parrots '' - employees. -
- You talk to them like cotton wool, they answer only in general, meaningless. repeating phrases. They do not provide any specific information, even a little scary.
I think that the offices of opposition movements are created by special services - for:
- Visibility of freedom and democracy,
- Revealing polit-not indifferent. -
For example, when I was leaving my place of work, 2 men approached me, showed me a special service ID, and offered to get into their car.
I got scared and sat down. I was asked a few questions. Then they offered to inform about the Chinese who worked with me. I verbally agreed and they let me go.
After that, I did not go to the opposition offices. But he didn’t inform either. - The intelligence services do not have a serious motivation system for informants. - In the USSR, the KGB only handed out `` Honorable Mentions '' and souvenirs. “If informers are intimidated, the quality of their work will drop dramatically - they will also become 'parrots'.
Backlog:
Chiefs of special services - "brakes" - lag behind `` life '' 10 years old.
Unfortunately, the mass of activists are also backward and feeble-minded - they are lagging behind the opportunities that technology provides them - by 10 years.
Semi-governed 'democracy':
In Russia there is - `` Fictitious democracy '' - with fictitious elections, pocket ships, etc.
However, in the West (Europe, USA), the political system is NOT democratic.
The authorities often make decisions that do not reflect the interests of the majority of local residents.
It cannot be said that electoral, etc. polit. systems reflect the interests of only the `` capitalists '', however, they are not completely democratic either.
At the same time, as in Russia, the main way of carrying out a non-popular policy is covert propaganda, despite the fact that, for example, in the USA it is formally prohibited.
- If people were fully competent, and their desires were not completely distorted, then they would make slightly different decisions than the authorities make now, which people `` in general '' approve.
Examples:
1. " Democratic " persecution on Indymedia.org
2. Repressions against the alter-electoral "Movement 15-M" in Spain.
That is, the growth of human manipulation threatens not only Russia, but also the West.
- In the West, the corresponding technologies are more developed.
True, the bigger threat comes from Russia. - It is much more difficult to hide IT than nuclear ones, which are also impossible to hide ..
& nbsp;
Troubleshooting:
idea: Not " organization " ;:
Idea " Network " not being an `` organization '' according to the criteria of the special services.
By the way, the lack of 'organizations' corresponds to anarchism.
" Network " would be purely a means of communication - `` postal service '', `` social network. ''
Everyone would keep their content on their own site and be responsible for it themselves.
idea: E-mail instead of anonymizer:
Anonymizers are prohibited in authoritarian states.
Idea " Network " is to use a personal (E-mail) instead of an anonymizer.
Many Western postal services are quite well protected from hacking by special services.
idea: Wiki:
E-mails of activists are posted on the Wiki site.
1. Any activist can delete his / her address with confirmation that it is his / her address.
2. An activist can create White Lists in your mail - so that almost all incoming mail goes to spam.
3. The activist can change the address, notifying those with whom he is communicating, at the same time he will get rid of old spam.
4. Spam filters in Mail Services work well.
5. Additional AI- Spam filter must also be created.
Some of the inconvenience of activists is paid off by the survival of the world.
`` He called himself a load - get into the Wiki-basket, '' as the Russians say.
idea: Invisibility of activity:
Idea " Network " also lies in the quantitative invisibility of activity.
& nbsp;
Idea: Search Engine Soul:
Idea " Network " also includes:
1. Text file containing:
a. E-mail
b. Soul Set tags.
2. in creating an AI search engine,
& nbsp;
Idea " Network " also consists in creating an AI service that filters spam in the user's mailbox. But such an AI service should only be configured by the user himself.
& nbsp;
& nbsp;
idea: censor service:
Idea " Network " also - in the Censor Service - identifying content that formally falls under the criteria of `` extremism '', which are guided by the special services.
It is advisable to use the same AI software that special services use to identify extremist content.
But the Censor Service is only for self-censoring.
idea: Decentralized money:
& nbsp;
& nbsp;
Content placement options:
Fortunately, IPs are not banned yet. - Even ISIS has an IP.
IP is not banned, but blocked. But this is surmountable, for example, using Telegram methods. Even the Chinese Firewall easy to get around.
a. Hosting:
There are hosters that ban websites. My site, for example, on a hosting in Russia disappeared from 2007 to 2013.
But there are many hosters that don't ban websites at all.
b. Cloud options.
c. Server on your computer:
It's too foolish to hide and fight off special services if the server is physically located in an authoritarian state.
& nbsp;
Development of an alternative economic program, -
for example, for Russia:
The Kremlin's propaganda successfully convinces Russians that life will be worse for them in a democracy - `` you will be the farm laborers of the Poles. ''
Opponents' counter-arguments are very primitive.
Almost all 'professional' economists work for the official machine.
But a new factor has appeared - IT-collective science.
The Deliberative Network is necessary - for the development of theory and Programs:
1. Scientific theory - proof of risk to Civilization - if nothing is done;
Modeling social processes for 300 years.
2. Theory - what to do to avoid negative scenarios.
3. Democratic Program for, for example, Russia:
4. Popularization of these developments.
Required:
1. Unambiguous proof of the benefits of the developed Program for Russians.
Moreover, this task is easier than that of the Kremlin propaganda, since the potential of a democratic system is indeed higher than that of an authoritarian one.
2. A painless and reliable rebuilding process.
& nbsp;
The Deliberative Network is needed to - develop social rules and decisions - without isolating a layer of people involved in this:
Model for making social rules and decisions - now:
Social media is generally `` for official use only ''
Based on this information and analysis - dedicated specialists - `` professionals '' develop suggestions for the boss in the hierarchy.
The boss makes decisions. He has a monopoly on this.
Model for making social rules and decisions by the Deliberative Network:
All social information is publicly available.
On the basis of this information and analysis, proposals and arguments for these proposals are developed in the IT-structure of the Network.
There is no assignment of functions to specific people.
Specialists - `` professionals '' will turn out to be the main developers - not legally, but in fact - as a result of free competition.
The chiefs are absent. There are also no `` arbiters '' choosing decisions. -
Rules and decisions are made in the IT structure of the same Network - according to the procedural rules developed and adopted by it - with the help of distributed AI ..
& nbsp;
The link between science and civil society is the function of the Deliberative Network:
Today, social and political science is almost not connected with social movements.
I'm not talking about people. -
Almost none of even the most active activists read academic publications.
At best, they read the work of individual `` fashionable '' scientists.
Factor of this:
Academic articles are geared towards fellow scientists;
as well as for customers - state. officials - on their interests, and not on the interests of public activists.
Articles written by 'bird' scientific language, highly specialized, contain a lot of `` water '' - even in the West.
Most activists often read not scientists, but interviews with politicians, articles by 'opinion leaders', 'experts', as well as popularizing journalists who retell scientists.
The function of most journalists is sabotage, distortion of the truth as a form of propaganda - even in the West.
There are several popular journals such as Scientific American written by scientists themselves.
But they rarely contain articles on acute political issues.
However, IT, AI today allow researchers and activists to be brought together on one platform. - So that scientists who want to debate with activists - directly.
AI today is able to effectively solve all the difficulties of such a dialogue - in real time.
Today, it is not the parallel social science that is optimal, but the parallel interface of social science.
& nbsp;
Collective Intelligence is a function of the Deliberative Network:
Modern science is very ineffective.
- Scientists can achieve many times greater results - if the direction of their work is more optimized and consistent.
Hierarchical, command management of science would be even less optimal.
However, IT, AI today make it possible to organize completely voluntary coordination of the work of atomized scientists.
Credit financing of science:
On the contrary, scientists should have creative freedom, they should not rely on reports to donors.
It is necessary to organize the work of scientists not at the level of determining the topics of grants, but at the level of the direct work of the scientists themselves.
Funding for scientists should be less discrete.
IT, AI today allow you to track the usefulness of work - in real time.
However, IT, AI should only be assistants. - A collective assessment of the usefulness of a scientist's work is a function of the Deliberative Network too.
Socio-political orientation of the Deliberative Network:
The effectiveness of science is sharply reduced in those areas where there are conflicting interests of its customers, namely, in the socio-political sciences.
Therefore, flat coordination of the work of scientists is necessary, primarily in the socio-political sphere.
& nbsp;
& nbsp;
Trusted activists are selected - `` Censors ''.
E-mail service selected:
1.With anonymous registration.
2. Not perlustrated, that is, letters in it cannot be read by anyone except the addressee.
3. Hard to crack,
To the mail of the Censor all correspondence is sent.
AI-software, preferably the same one used by special services, weeds out `` extremist '' - dubious letters.
All missed emails are posted impersonally in the form of a `` Blog. ''
Formally on the Network there is only 1 'activist' - " Censor " ;.
& nbsp;
" Censor " views incoming
Only letters that meet the formal criteria of the special services `` extremism '', `` drugs '' are not posted etc.
" Blog " structured:
Activists
Problems:
1. Bans. There are only a few uncensored forums in the world.
2. Trolls.
3. Structurelessness.
What is the Deliberative Network for ?:
No artists needed:
Blindly executing my commands might and would make sense if they were reliable.
But they can't be like that already because there was no criticism.
Besides, executing commands is against my principles.
I doubt it:
I'm not sure about anything.
I scare the end of the world with a confident tone - in order to attract attention. But I'm not sure about him.
I am only sure that due to the importance of the problem, it is necessary to draw attention to it.
I consider myself a weak researcher and forecaster - I will not be able to model the future - it is necessary for a team of enthusiastic intellectuals to investigate the problem and refine the forecast for 300 years.
My " articles " look pale in comparison with the books of famous political scientists, especially since these scientists have much more work, and today there are many thousands of scientists themselves.
A riddle - why are there no scientists at all in the most important area of science?
Maybe the problem itself is contrived?
Your opinion?
I doubt that I am greatly mistaken:
1. "Class" science:
I believe that the reason for the inadequacy of the directions of science is not in the stupidity of scientists, but in the social. order.
- Those on whom this science depends are not interested in the direction of science associated with the polarization of society.
Your opinion?
2. I'm adequate enough:
To train my intuition, I first try to find a solution, and only then get acquainted with analogs. That is, I try to look for a solution from scratch, and not improve other people's solutions, not adhere to any school, but be independent.
It often turns out that the `` bike '' has already been invented, but I analyze the reasons for the aberrations of my thinking, and the subsequent solutions to problems are already better for me.
Example: Mutualism:
In the article " Libertarian Socialism and the Ark of Freedom " " I proposed joint ventures and usufruct.
Then I read about Proudhon, and it turned out that he proposed the same thing almost 200 years ago - in the concept of Mutualism, - The term "Mutualism" appeared 200 years ago.
For 200 years, the ideas of the obscure Proudhon have survived under the fierce criticism of the `` capitalists ''.
The coincidences with Proudhon of my decision indicate that my `` hanging in a vacuum '', without relying on predecessors, the decision is not entirely far-fetched, and that my reasoning can be trusted. And I can cite enough examples like that.
Thus, in particular, you can trust my opinion that a forecast for 300 years is possible.
Your opinion?
Forecast possible:
I believe that the forecast for 300 years is possible - accurate enough to take action.
But for a sufficiently accurate forecast, a lot of work of a large team is required.
I believe that it is necessary to spend significant efforts, since the survival of mankind may depend on the accuracy of the forecast. Due to this, the forecast should be maximum.
Your opinion?
What is the Network for ?:
I believe that a scientific organization implementing social services is possible. the order of ordinary people.
1.With the use of the Internet, AI-soul-search engines and AI-coordinators.
2. With today's general education.
Your opinion?
Engineering:
I consider myself an engineer. - There have been many attempts to implement a marine settlement, including by successful billionaires, but all of them are extremely stupid in terms of engineering.
Therefore, I want the Network to be engaged in research and modeling of the future, and I would rather be an executor - in a team of developers - implementing solutions found by researchers.
Your opinion?
|